Print        

Hizbollah’s Great Epic Revisited

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Mehr News 

Victory Strategies of Islamic Resistance of Lebanon

May 25 marks the anniversary of the liberation of South Lebanon from the claws of the Zionist usurpers. Eight years ago South Lebanon was liberated by the Hizbollah Resistance Movement. Although years have passed since this epic victory, there are still lots of different comments on various official and expert levels.

The Islamic Resistance of Lebanon was formed and developed as an underground military organization to counter the Zionist occupiers who attacked South Lebanon in 1982 and occupied Beirut.

The Resistance announced its independent operations two years later, that is in early 1984 but before this date it carried out its activities within the framework of Resistance Front of Lebanon.

The front turned into Islamic Resistance after withdrawal from most occupied areas by the Zionist army in 1986 and inflicted smashing strikes on the Zionist enemy through its operations against the occupying forces and their mercenaries in South Lebanon and Western Baqa’a (Baqa’a al-Gharbiyye).

In the “Neda al-Moqawema” publication, a Lebanese analyst, Talal Atrissi, describes the factors leading to the victory of Hizbollah as follows:

Factors behind Success of Resistance

1- Independence of action and Confidentiality

Contrary to previous resistance movements, the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon has not participated in operations against occupiers with any of the sides since its inception till now. This, of course, was not due to ideological issues but due to concern over infiltration of the enemy with respect to the divergence of tendencies as well as political and ideological orientations. Because this number makes control very difficult, something which has been proven in the experiences of previous resistance movements and especially in Palestine as a result of which great blows were sustained and many personalities were assassinated.

2- Range of Resistance

Because of launching operations without coordination and cooperation with other groups, the Islamic Resistance was accused of misusing resistance as a means to attain its political objectives and also ignoring other resistance groups. However, it managed to leave behind these charges and open the doors of cooperation with other non-Islamic groups who were willing to fight against the occupiers without giving up its specific organizational, security and military frameworks.

For this reason, Secretary General of the Hizbollah Movement Seyed Hassan Nasrollah on November 3, 1997 proclaimed the formation of Lebanese groups to resist against Israeli occupiers as an all-inclusive and broad-based organization for all people who are willing to take part in armed resistance against usurping forces in South Lebanon.

Nasrollah said in this respect that this organization will remain separate from the Islamic Resistance chart which is ready to offer overall support in all the fields needed by groups to carry out military and security operations in the occupied areas of Lebanon.

This showed not only the Islamic Resistance does not intend to monopolize the fight against occupiers but also has realized the importance of broadening of the scope of participation in the war against the enemy in the Lebanese society where various groups and political and religious tribes live side by side each other.

This understanding was the most important motive behind formation of Lebanese groups who had carried out dozens of operations against Zionist occupiers and their mercenaries during the occupation time because the Islamic nature of the resistance was one of the most important obstacles for non-Muslim Lebanese and various political parties to join the Islamic Resistance in their fight against occupiers.

The Islamic Resistance had drawn up four axes in the process of campaign:

a. Battle against the enemy and liberate the home country;

b. Campaign against normalization of ties with the Zionist regime;

c. Thwart enemy efforts to stabilize bases of occupation and the usurping regime of Israel as a legitimate and legal reality in the heart of the region;

d. Create axis for a huge national, patriotic and Islamic consensus comprising forces, leaders of various parties and religions as well as ideologies and political, cultural and intellectual orientations.

3- Deployment of advanced military methods

The Islamic Resistance made use of the established methods of guerrilla warfare that is small groups for launching ambush on enemy patrols, fortifications and communication lines as well as installing bombs and mines. But the real reason behind success of this method was in fact presenting an experience different from other security, propaganda and political experiences in Lebanon which can be described in this way:

a.    Variety and divergence of tactics and operations

In its operations and battles, the Islamic Resistance did not use merely methods such as ambush along roads and mountainous areas or barraging bases of the Zionist enemy but launched broad operations against one or several bases simultaneously and in many cases succeeded to take over the bases for several hours or take its personnel hostage.

b.   Promotion of intelligence and espionage power

One of the achievements of the Islamic Resistance is the increase in intelligence and espionage capability in controlling movements of the occupying army and their mercenaries and inflicting big casualties on them through launching ambushes or exploding bombs and mines inside and outside the occupied strip and the joint borders with the Zionist  regime which gave rise to doubts and questions at military and security circles of the Zionist regime and formation of inspection committees on the extent of infiltration of Hizbollah members among Israeli forces and their mercenaries.

This was intensified especially following the heavy defeat of commando forces of the Qods Occupying army at Ansariyah village.

On 04.09.1997 the Resistance forces ambushed and smashed a 15-member group of special commandos of the Zionist army at Ansariya village.

After some time, the Resistance swapped their bodies with those of 40 Lebanese martyrs, 30 of whom were Islamic Resistance martyrs on 25.06.1998. This was the first such defeat for Tel Aviv in the history of the Zionist regime.

c.    Psychological war and war of information dissemination

The Resistance made use of all psychological and spiritual methods to influence the public opinion, military and non-military members of the enemy and managed to train a number of its forces within the framework of war of information dissemination to make films of operations against the occupying forces and their mercenaries.

In these pictures, live scenes of attacks on bases and hoisting of flag on strongholds and fortifications were registered and recorded. For instance, after an operation the Resistance forces entered a Zionist base on 27.02.1998, a commander of the communications unit of the occupying army claimed that Resistance forces had not entered the base but airing the film which showed the militants in the base and hoisting the Hizbollah flag over it, the Resistance proved they were lying.

This recurred during the operations which led to take over of al-Dabashe base on 12.05.1998 and Hadase base on 02.07.1998.

On the other hand, the Resistance used Internet, al-Manar TV network and Noor Radio to air reports on its operations and its messages to the world people. This was the first time in the history of resistance against occupation in Lebanon that modern filmmaking and information dissemination techniques were utilized.

4- Countering enemy and calming domestic atmosphere

Since its inception in 1983 till now (as far as possible until the end of the occupation of major parts of the Lebanese territory), the Resistance has done its best to avoid any clash with organizations, groups and political and military parties as well as the Lebanese government and has focused all its efforts on fighting the enemy and calming down the domestic front.

For this reason and based on this strategy, after martyrdom by the armed forces of several of its advocates during peaceful demonstrations in protest to the Oslo Pact, Hizbollah not only refrained from any clashes with the army but also considerably and exceptionally expanded its cooperation and relations with the army during the recent years to the extent that this cooperation led to exposing of espionage networks of the enemy, as well as arrest and trial of its agents in Lebanon.

Exposure and smashing of these networks created a great hue and cry and criticisms inside various circles of the Zionist regime among which the statements of a member of Knesset and a former official of the General Security Service of the Zionist regime (Shabak) Gideon Ezra can be mentioned.

He told the radio of the Zionist army that “it was very difficult to believe disclosure of an Israeli network in such a size and it showed the failure of our plans.”

This is while Seyed Hassan Nasrollah had said when swapping bodies of Lebanese martyrs with those of Zionist military men that the officers and soldiers of the Lebanese army attend funeral procession of their combatants, sing martyrdom songs for them and salute them with their guns. Today the people of Lebanon, the enemy and the entire world should know that the blood of the martyrs of the Lebanese army is mingled with that of the martyrs of the Resistance and this is what makes Israel and the United States wrathful and fills their hearts with pain.

In this ceremony, Nasrollah met with representative of Emile Lahoud, the then commander of the army who leading a military delegation congratulated the return of PoWs and bodies of martyrs.
Of course, in some cases slight clashes occurred but this never damaged the resolution and path of the Resistance in continuing campaign against the Zionist enemy and its mercenaries.

A minute survey of the chaos and disorder in Lebanon and clashes between Lebanese and Palestinian organizations and parties before and after the attack of the Tel Aviv regime on Lebanon can divulge the depth of Hizbollah efforts to preserve and continue resistance and gather people around one national axis.

5- Mopping up of mercenaries

During years of occupation, the Resistance made broad efforts to smash institutions, organizations and morale of Antoine Lahad’s mercenaries and carried out very successful operations against military commanders, security officials and militia subservients of the Zionist regime since 1998.

Not only this led to emergence of strong differences among security and military institutions of the mercenaries and made them accuse each other of ignorance and lack of feeling responsible but also helped success of Islamic Resistance operations and failure of militia called the Army of South Lebanon.

On the other hand, besides inflicting military blows, the Resistance encouraged mercenaries to flee by using propaganda devices and called them on to repent and surrender themselves to the government or the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon.

All these efforts caused Lahad’s mercenaries to leave Jazzin region in 1999 and all the occupied regions of South Lebanon in 2000.

6- Using public mobilization instruments

During the occupation period, the Islamic Resistance used mechanisms of public mobilization and for military operations guerrilla mechanism. However, after the insignificant withdrawal of the enemy from the border strip in 1986, the Resistance restricted its operations to military operation without public mobilization and very quickly launched a huge propaganda wave through al-Manar TV, Noor Radio and al-Ahd newspaper airing and publishing reports of the operations, speeches by officials, history of occupation, crimes of enemy, and presenting religious, cultural and political guidance.

Public mobilization mainly covered the occupied region in South Lebanon between 1982 and 1986 and had a religious and environmental aroma. Therefore, based on its responsibility, the Resistance made the utmost use of the atmosphere of religious mobilization against occupation which was being propagated by the ulema and theologians at various mosques and villages even after the establishment of Islamic Resistance and announcement of its existence.

The first sparkles of popular uprising against the occupiers were given off in March 1983 after the detention of Sheikh Raqib Harb at one of the villages of Jabshit occupied region and spread to the nearby villages after a while. Eventually it forced the occupiers to release the sheikh.

Although after a while demonstrations and chaos blanketed all the regions of Lebanon following the sheikh’s assassination and the ulema called on people to stage demonstrations, put afire tires and pile up stones at the entrances to prevent the enemy from entering. The ulema also invited people to boycott Israeli goods and refrain from cooperation and participation in Zionist projects. This was repeated on May 17, 1984 namely the time of signing agreement between Lebanon and the Zionist regime.

In such an atmosphere filled with the memory of martyrs of Islam, Imam Hussein (AS) (the third Imam of the household of the Prophet (PBUH)) and morale of resistance against tyranny, people attacked Zionist enemy forces with stone, wood and whatever they had in their hands. Mosques were turned to their gathering places to once again revive the memory of resistance of Jabal Amel residents against the French colonialism.

Conclusion

At last by the lapse of time, the Zionist regime’s mercenaries withdrew from the occupied lands in South Lebanon in 2000 and this achievement gained a special status in the public opinion of the world and the region.

This supremacy of a resistance movement against the equipped army of Israel showed that the region will witness other potentially official players in the future who can challenge regional expansionism and insatiability of some powers in the region.

After achieving victory in the military arena, the Hizbollah movement got closer to the decision making quarter and with its new approach thwarted conspiracies hatched after the withdrawal of the Zionist regime through rational participation in the political arena of Lebanon and without exposing the fundamental ideals of the movement to political interactions.

Source: http://www.mehrnews.com/fa/

طراحی و توسعه آگاه‌سیستم